DETAILED ACTION
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 10/14/2024 has been considered by the examiner.
Claim Objections
Claims 12-19 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 12, lines 4-5 the recited “the plurality of signals” should be “a plurality of signals”.
Dependent claims 13-19 are objected to because they depend on objected claim 12.
Claim 19, line 5 the recited “downlink” should be “uplink” to match the claimed “uplink signals” of claim 3, (also signals received from a UE at a network node are uplink signals not downlink signals).
Double Patenting
The nonstatutory double patenting rejection is based on a judicially created doctrine grounded in public policy (a policy reflected in the statute) so as to prevent the unjustified or improper timewise extension of the “right to exclude” granted by a patent and to prevent possible harassment by multiple assignees. A nonstatutory double patenting rejection is appropriate where the conflicting claims are not identical, but at least one examined application claim is not patentably distinct from the reference claim(s) because the examined application claim is either anticipated by, or would have been obvious over, the reference claim(s). See, e.g., In re Berg, 140 F.3d 1428, 46 USPQ2d 1226 (Fed. Cir. 1998); In re Goodman, 11 F.3d 1046, 29 USPQ2d 2010 (Fed. Cir. 1993); In re Longi, 759 F.2d 887, 225 USPQ 645 (Fed. Cir. 1985); In re Van Ornum, 686 F.2d 937, 214 USPQ 761 (CCPA 1982); In re Vogel, 422 F.2d 438, 164 USPQ 619 (CCPA 1970); In re Thorington, 418 F.2d 528, 163 USPQ 644 (CCPA 1969).
A timely filed terminal disclaimer in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(c) or 1.321(d) may be used to overcome an actual or provisional rejection based on nonstatutory double patenting provided the reference application or patent either is shown to be commonly owned with the examined application, or claims an invention made as a result of activities undertaken within the scope of a joint research agreement. See MPEP § 717.02 for applications subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA as explained in MPEP § 2159. See MPEP § 2146 et seq. for applications not subject to examination under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . A terminal disclaimer must be signed in compliance with 37 CFR 1.321(b).
The filing of a terminal disclaimer by itself is not a complete reply to a nonstatutory double patenting (NSDP) rejection. A complete reply requires that the terminal disclaimer be accompanied by a reply requesting reconsideration of the prior Office action. Even where the NSDP rejection is provisional the reply must be complete. See MPEP § 804, subsection I.B.1. For a reply to a non-final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.111(a). For a reply to final Office action, see 37 CFR 1.113(c). A request for reconsideration while not provided for in 37 CFR 1.113(c) may be filed after final for consideration. See MPEP §§ 706.07(e) and 714.13.
The USPTO Internet website contains terminal disclaimer forms which may be used. Please visit www.uspto.gov/patent/patents-forms. The actual filing date of the application in which the form is filed determines what form (e.g., PTO/SB/25, PTO/SB/26, PTO/AIA /25, or PTO/AIA /26) should be used. A web-based eTerminal Disclaimer may be filled out completely online using web-screens. An eTerminal Disclaimer that meets all requirements is auto-processed and approved immediately upon submission. For more information about eTerminal Disclaimers, refer to www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/applying-online/eterminal-disclaimer.
Claims 1-2, 6-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims 1-2, 6-18 of U.S. Patent No. 12,119,915. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,15,16,17,18 of U.S. 12,119,915 claim the subject matter respectively claimed by instant claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18.
5. Claims 1-18 are rejected on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting as being unpatentable over claims of 1-15 U.S. Patent No. 11,552,692. Although the claims at issue are not identical, they are not patentably distinct from each other because claims 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 of U.S. 11,552,692 claim the subject matter respectively claimed by instant claims 1 and 9, 2, 3 and 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12 and 16, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
6. In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
7. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
8. Claims 1-2, 5-10, 12-17, 19 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by xRAN, XRAN FFH.CUS.0-v01.00, Technical Specification, xRAN Fronthaul Working Group, Control, User and Synchronization Plane Specification, April 4, 2018 (this reference is cited in the 10/14/2024 IDS and a copy was submitted in case 17/298084 (instant application 18/914708 is a continuation of 17/298084)).
With respect to claim 1, the XRAN document discloses: providing, at the LLS-CU (page 8, LLS-CU being part of the base station of Fig. 1, page 7, Architecture aspects, page 14, section 5.3.1 user data transmitted to RU (for transmission to the user) from the LLS-CU, page 15, Fig. 11), a plurality of downlink signals to be transmitted to a user equipment (UE) over a wireless radio interface (page 8, section 2.1.1 Fig. 2 and description of split 7-2x, refer to the plurality of downlink signals generated by scrambling, modulation, layer mapping (on the right), performed in the LLS-CU, page 10, table 1 (DL) and a wireless radio interface created by the antennas of the RU); allocating the plurality of downlink signals to a plurality of resource elements (REs) of a physical downlink channel of the wireless radio interface to be used for transmitting the plurality of downlink signals to the UE (page 31, section 5.4.5.5 mask indicates which REs are used within an XRB, and refer to page 17, section type “1” used for downlink radio channels also page 9, lines 1-3 also page 8, refer to the “RE mapping” which corresponds to the claimed allocating) ; generating a data-associated control information (DACI) message including a section description associated with the plurality of downlink signals (refer to Fig. 11, the generated DACI message, page 14, lines 27-29, page 17, lines 11-24, refer to lines 21-22, section type for section type “1” corresponds to the claimed section description, also page 16 section 5.4.2, lines 1-4), the DACI message including a resource element mask that defines the location of one or more REs within a physical resource block (PRB) of a downlink signal on the physical downlink channel (page 17, refer to reMask (line 31) and section 5.4.5.5 reMask defines the location of one or more REs within a PRB e.g. the default value where all REs are active), and an indication of a plurality of sets of beamforming weights to be applied by a radio unit (RU) when transmitting the plurality of downlink signals to the UE (e.g. hybrid beamforming (digital and analog) applied by the RU Fig. 2, Table 1 page 10, page 31, lines 34-41, for example refer to the plurality of sets of beamforming weights indicated by the beamId (e.g. digital beamforming performed per RE) or beamforming weights (IQ) per RE (page 10, Table 1, also page 33, lines 5-16) as indicated by the weight flag page 31, lines 27-33. Additionally refer to Table 8 entries for beamId. bfwI, bfwQ (for TRX0) also remaining beamforming weights, page 6, lines 32-34), wherein sets of beamforming weights are associated with resource elements according to the resource element mask (digital beamforming signaled and applied per RE (used or activated RE locations are indicated by the reMask) per beam per slot); transmitting the DACI message to the RU (as shown in Fig. 11, section 5.4.1 and 5.4.2); and transmitting the plurality of downlink signals to the RU for transmission to the UE (Fig. 2, transmission from LLS-CU to RU and Fig. 11 also refer to the U-Plane (data transfer) and C-Plane (control information) transmission from LLS-CU to the RU and Table 3 on page 11).
With respect to claim 2, the xRAN document discloses wherein: the plurality of downlink signals are assigned to a plurality of PRBs in a section associated with the section description (within section field refer to assignment of PRBs based on parameters startXrbc and numXrbc, page 31, lines 1-19) ; and the RE mask defines positions of REs for all PRBs in the section (according to numXebc which defines the XRBs where the control section is valid (control section includes reMask, page 14, lines 27-29)).
With respect to claim 5, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of a set of beamforming weights applies to each RE at a location in a PRB corresponding to a position defined in the RE mask (Table 1, at least digital beamforming information signaled per RE per beam as related to BeamId and/or bfWI, bfwQ (Fig. 14)).
With respect to claim 6, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (beamforming weights for Q and I, bfwQ, bfwI per RE).
With respect to claim 7, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises a plurality of beam indices, each of the beam indices corresponding to one of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (page 10, digital beamforming information per RE per beam per slot and Table 8 bfwQ and bfwI (each 16 bits) correspond to beam indices that correspond to one of the sets of beamforming weights (IQ weight set)).
With respect to claim 8, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises a plurality of sets of beamforming attributes that describe respective antenna beams (page 31, section 5.4.5.9, for hybrid beamforming (sets of beam attributes as described in lines 37-41)).
With respect to claim 9, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights is carried in a section extension of the section description (page 17, indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (page 17, section fields which include beamId or bfwI and bfwQ correspond to a section extension of section description (section type)).
With respect to claim 10, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the section description comprises a plurality of section extensions, wherein each section extension of the plurality of section extensions identifies one of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights (as applied to at least Table 1 for digital beamforming, plurality of section extensions per RE per beam per slot and according to the ReMask. Also refer to Table 8 refer to bfwI and bfwQ and the remaining beamforming weights BfwI and BfwQ up to L TRXs).
Claim 12 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 1 above from the point of view of the RU (which receives the DACI message from the LLS-CU and performs transmission of beamformed signals to the UE using the plurality of sets of beamforming weights). Additionally note that page 9, Fig. 3 discloses UL split signal processing and lines 31-33, disclosing digital beamforming (in the uplink (UL) or reception of signals from a UE and Table 2 on page 10) performed by the RU also page 10, Fig. 4, scheduling and beamforming commands are used in UL (signal reception by the RU) and those commands are described in 5.4.2 type “1” fields used in Uplink channel, and cited above in the rejection of claim 1).
With respect to claim 13, the xRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises an indication of which of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights is to be applied to each of the plurality of REs used to transmit or receive the plurality of signals (refer to page 10, Tables 1 and 2 digital beamforming information per RE per beam per slot (for DL and UL) and Table 8 for example refer to bfwI and bfwQ (for TRX 0) and the remaining beaforming weights bfwI and BfwQ (up to L TRXs). Additionally refer to sections 5.4.5.8 and 5.4.5.9).
Claims 14-17 are rejected based on the rationale used to reject claims 6, 8-10 above.
Claim 19 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject 14 from the point of view of the LLS-CU and for uplink (UL) split operation (pages 9-10, at Fig. 3, and Table 2 and sections/explanation in the rejection of claim 14).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
9. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
10. Claims 3-4 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over xRAN, XRAN FFH.CUS.0-v01.00, Technical Specification, xRAN Fronthaul Working Group, Control, User and Synchronization Plane Specification, April 4, 2018 in view of Seo (U.S. 11,109,383)(this reference is cited in the 10/14/2024 IDS).
With respect to claim 3, the xRAN document discloses: providing an indication o
a set of beamforming weights for each position defined in the RE mask (for example set of beamforming weights bfwI, bfwQ or digital and analog beamforming identified by beamId (page 31, lines 34-41) for each position defined in the RE mask (which indicates which REs are used)).
The xRAN document does not expressly disclose: unique.
In the field of wireless signal communication using REs, Seo discloses: unique (beam used for each RE belonging to the same RB, column 13, lines 56-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the xRAN document based on the teachings of Seo to provide an indication of a unique set of beamforming weights (bfwI, bfwQ or digital and analog beamforming identified by beamId) for each active RE to obtain a spatial diversity gain in an XRB (PRB) in which the active REs belong (Seo , column 13, lines 56-59).
With respect to claim 4, the xRAN document discloses: providing an indication of a set of beamforming weights for each RE in the section at a location in a PRB corresponding to a position defined in the RE mask (according to the set of beamforming weights bfwI, bfwQ or digital and analog beamforming identified by beamId (page 31, lines 34-41) for each position defined in the RE mask (which indicates which REs are used) which are in the section (section field) which includes reMask, beamId, bfwI, bfwQ)
The xRAN document does not expressly disclose: unique.
In the field of wireless signal communication using REs, Seo discloses: unique (beam used for each RE belonging to the same RB, column 13, lines 56-59).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the xRAN document based on the teachings of Seo to provide an indication of a unique set of beamforming weights (bfwI, bfwQ or digital and analog beamforming identified by beamId) for each active RE to obtain a spatial diversity gain in an XRB (PRB) in which the active REs belong (Seo , column 13, lines 56-59).
11. Claims 11, 18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over xRAN, XRAN FFH.CUS.0-v01.00, Technical Specification, xRAN Fronthaul Working Group, Control, User and Synchronization Plane Specification, April 4, 2018 in view Wu et al. (U.S. 2020/0195312)(this reference is cited in the 10/14/2024 IDS).
With respect to claim 11, the XRAN document discloses: wherein the indication of the plurality of sets of beamforming weights comprises a first set of complete beamforming weights and at least one set of beamforming weights (Table 1, beamforming information per RE and beamId for digital or hybrid beamforming or bfwI, bfwQ for a “first” RE of the activated REs as indicated by the reMask, the beamforming information for at least one of the rest of the activated REs is indicated similarly).
The xRAN document does not disclose: a delta-coded, that are delta-coded with respect to the first set of complete beamforming weights.
In the field of signaling weights, Wu et al. disclose: delta-coded, delta-coded with respect to a first complete (index of a) beamforming weight ([0168] refer to the disclosed delta-coded (differential) index (pointing to a precoding or beamforming weight of a codebook) is delta-coded (differential that is “a relationship between it and a given precoding vector is indicated”) with respect to first precoding vector (index) which is completely indicated. Also refer to [0060]).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the xRAN document based on the teachings of Wu et al., and use delta-coding (differential method coding) to indicate at least one of set of beamforming weights (of an RE) using a differential method with respect to the completely indicated set of beamforming weights of another RE to reduce signaling overhead in the indication of the sets of beamforming weights of the REs ([0168] of Wu et al.).
Claim 18 is rejected based on the rationale used to reject claim 11 above.
Conclusion
12. The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
XRAN-FH.CUS.0-v02.00, this document is cited in the 10/14/2024 IDS and a copy of this document was provided in parent case 17/298084 (which also cited this document in an IDS (5/28/2021)). XRAN-FH.CUS.0-v02.00 was published on July 27, 2018 (per [00123] of the instant application specification).
Refer to at least section 5.4.6 Section Extension Commands, Table 5-12, Table 5-13, Table 15-16 and Annex J.
Contact Information
13. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SOPHIA VLAHOS whose telephone number is (571)272-5507. The examiner can normally be reached M 8:00-4:00, TWRF 8:00-2:00.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, SAM K AHN can be reached at 571-272-3044. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
SOPHIA VLAHOS
Examiner
Art Unit 2633
/SOPHIA VLAHOS/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2633 12/18/2025